• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

Film What's the Last Film You Saw? v. Tell Us What You Thought!

Status
Not open for further replies.
^my buddy was filmed renting ryan gosling a car for that movie. didn't make the cut.


Barocco

trying godard's theory about a gun and a girl. often feels like a direct nod, including the music and how it's used. going for pulp that becomes something more, an exploration of identity. but this movie is a mess. especially the first half.

i rented it because it stars isabelle adjani. i'm completely in love with her character in The Tenant. this was filmed or at least released the same year--funny, given its similarities in theme. her character is much less captivating in this one. i would even say some of her acting is straight up shitty at moments, but the film is such bunk that's not really fair. she still looks great in it. like a cross between anna karina and molly ringwald. time for criterion to release Possession.
 
lethalweapon4.jpg


Classic and so fuckin funny =D

Lethal-Weapon-4-Opening-Scene-lethal-weapon-748170_518_391.jpg


picture-6.png


aph_4.jpg


3675.jpg


lethal_weapon.jpg
 
Last edited:
Blue in the Face

like a mix between those Coffee and Cigarettes--which is alluded to in the film by a time traveling jim jarmusch--style movies and Do the Right Thing. Blue in the Face addresses serious topics, but maintains a light feel. i think it is worth watching. it's above average; it's just extremely unoriginal feeling. my favorite shot is definitely the indian girl giving a fact about the dodgers and the film not cutting until after she loses face. i'll be checking out Smoke, but might not bother if it wasn't on netflix instant.

edit:
alright, jarmusch made a short titled "Coffee and Cigarettes" in '86. then a second. then a third, released the same year as Blue in the Face. knew his mention of the combo had to be a nod. IMDB helps me solve so many mysteries.
 
Last edited:
6a00d834515f9b69e2014e8939ce36970d-800wi


This was a pretty peculiar film, with lots of celestial imagery sequences and non-linear story telling. Overall I think it was pretty good, although it may take another watch to take it in completely.
 
Michael Moore Hates America

Michael Moore Hates America is a documentary about a documentarian; and, a documentary about documentaries. Film-maker Michael Wilson attempts to expose the hypocrisy behind Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 911. While doing so, he inadvertently exposes himself as a propagandist.

Moore’s debut film, Roger & Me, criticised the lack of accountability in the United States. Specifically, he was refused an interview with Roger Smith; CEO of General Motors. The little man does not have a voice, said Moore. Then, when the tables turned, the same situation arose.

Wilson structures his film around a non-existent interview with Moore. There are numerous scenes, mimicking Roger & Me, in which Wilson attempts to set up a meeting and fails. But, of course, he wants to fail. That is the purpose of his documentary, the declaration of hypocrisy.

Objectivity is an issue that arises repeatedly throughout the course of the film; it is, after all, what separates documentary from propaganda. Nature documentaries do not make statements; they have no orientation. When you see footage of a cheetah eating a gazelle, you are free to make up your own mind. Michael Moore is criticized for manipulating footage, and using various other filmic techniques, in order to serve a particular agenda: he does not make neutral observational films; he makes political statements. There is only one way to interpret Bowling for Columbine.

The problem with Michael Moore Hates America is in the title. It is not a question – Does Michael Moore Hate America? It is a statement, with a particular political orientation.

Throughout the course of the film, Wilson encounters a series of ethical quandaries. He is forced to interview people under false pretences, often omitting – or changing – the title of his film. The documentary eventually turns inside-out, as it becomes apparent to the crew that they are essentially lying in order to expose a liar who lied in order to expose other liars. Wilson becomes a part of the hypocrisy that he set out to expose; and, astoundingly, he justifies it in the name of the constitution. Rather than labelling himself a hypocrite, he concludes that both he and Moore are expressing their right to freedom of speech.

Apparently, according to Michael Moore Hates America, it is impossible to remain neutral. The parallels between Moore and Wilson are inevitable; all documentaries are part propaganda; all truth is part lie; the very techniques that Wilson criticizes are unavoidable, to some degree.

Hates America is not a particularly good film, but it is extremely interesting. It is essentially a Michael Moore film about Michael Moore; a propaganda film about propaganda; a cheetah, chasing its tail. By exposing Moore, Wilson exposes himself.

1.5 stars
 
The Evil Dead

i watched this with friends and alcohol, which helped. it is decent. rough and cheesy. but that gives it a raw film-y feel, and the movie has its moments. my favorite being [spoil]when the blond dude gets back mutilated the same moment the girlfriend drops to her knees giggling. the final survivor is so suddenly and brutally faced with being alone[/spoil]--gave me a sense of being overwhelmed that edges on being scared. the chained cellar door aspect is cool too. nothing adds to the stress of a situation like a monster in the basement.

like almost any worthwhile horror movie, the lighting was the main attraction. very dario argento. Suspiria's stage lighting on glass and beyond the threshold. the spotlighting of Phenomena, though no little girl in white to shine it on.

the outtakes and behind the scenes footage on the special features is worth the extra 20 minutes.
 
Last edited:
hydroazuanacaine said:
The Evil Dead

nothing adds to the stress of a situation like a monster in the basement.
.
Click to expand...

Hee hee

...Just when you come home from a hard day of toiling and have to deal with the 'cellar door' fiasco- nothing worse.

Great show. Def rough and cheese-y! That be the low budget but, this makes its charm even more apparent imo!

The Evil Dead II would have to be one of my favorites- more satirical, I love the combination of farce and horror with the beauty of that wonderful rough animation
-pure sensory entertainment on a screen. It isn't one to be analysed-just enjoyed! Whether one likes, or not. ;)

...speaking of animation, saw this short film over weekend:

Madame Tutli Putli
madametutli.jpg


Wonderous. :)
 
Last edited:
the orgininal v minieries. did the whole thing last night. fun to see a couple of actors from the excellent hbo prison series "oz" together in it. for some reason, i thought it was scary as a kid. dunno why, it's just silly action with some fairly decent drama thrown in.
 
The Help - Turned it off before the 30 minute mark. Absolute trash. 0/5

We Need to Talk About Kevin - The Omen, but multi-functional. Serves as an effective surface film, while at the same time provoking thought and challenging issues. It is both commercially viable and artistic. Solid performances. Few compromises. 4/5
 
To Kill a Mockingbird is an imperfect adaptation of a book I am yet to read. Making a perfect adaptation of a great novel is not difficult; it is impossible. People criticize films for not being true to their source material. But that is not the issue. Mockingbird is beautifully written. The quality of the words is astounding. It is so well written that, after watching the film, I decided to not only read the book but read all Pulitzer Prize winning novels. For the film version to be as good as the book, everyone involved in the production would have to match the novelist. Child actors will never be as good at acting as a Pulitzer Prize winning author is at writing. An entire cast of adult actors are unlikely to either. That is why adaptations are often imperfect; because, unlike literature, film is a group effort. And, it is much easier to produce perfect words than it is to produce perfect performances; actors, being less versatile than words.

4.5 stars
 
There are no rules that words have to adhere to. Some people don't adhere to rules that are insignificant, but nobody breaks the unbreakable rules. My point being, that people - as creative tools - are limited by definition. They have an age and a hair colour. They have hair. Their ethnicity. Their height. Their Voice. The reason most actors don't do accents well is: because it's fucking difficult to do and they know that the audience doesn't give a shit. We will forgive a bad accent as long as the film is good, because actors are limited to this range, defined by both what is expected of them and what they are physically capable of producing. Language can be flawed. It often is. But the potential is infinite.
 
Last edited:
i get what you are saying. i think you are missing a piece of the puzzle though. words make sense because they have accepted meanings. the contexts they can be put in are infinite, but so are the possible movements of an individual. in addition to by flaws in their user, the potential of words is limited by the parameters of written language.


Alice, Sweet Alice

i had been looking forward to this one for a long time. i was under the impression it stars child brooke shields. nope. this film kills off any potential it had at the 10-minute mark. we get to see her in two beautiful dresses. for the few moments she is on screen, it's horribly apparent she should have been the focus. i watched a little bit of the commentary. at the beginning they joke about their film owing its continued existence to brooke. then during the scene that must be so painful for them to go over in hindsight, they awkwardly praise the girl who was cast as the lead. they flop and say the film has prevailed because it defies the conventions of typical genre film, as what could have been is dragged across the floor and thrown away. oops.

really too bad, because it is a true and decent attempt at making good pulp. for a b-movie, it's well constructed. and it lightly touches on something creepy. but there is not anything great about it. who the murderer isn't is instantly obvious. 15 minutes into the film, i would have made a million dollar bet on who it is. at that point i was waiting for it to be over. there are some mystery/thriller buffs who would probably know before the murder even happens.

the only scary shot is the lowering of karen spages' (brooke) autopsy photo down whatever you call those old-fashion elevator trays. the best shot is when alice is skipped during communion for the second time. the twist at the end is cheesy, but it's set up for and it's a better than acceptable ending for a psychological horror film.

the director says he cast her after seeing a specific picture from her modeling career. his description narrows it down to one of these two. they're good. NSFW for post size and because i recently posted them elsewhere in F&T.
NSFW:
brookebyacker75+2.jpg


brookebyacker75.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm not missing any puzzle pieces. The constraints of language are imposed upon it. Language is not finite. Conventions can be defied. Anything can happen in a story. Fictional characters who aren't portrayed by actors have infinite possibilities. You said people can move in an infinite number of ways. I disagree. People are incapable of sticking their heads up their asses. Technology allows this to happen on film but it can't allow an actor to surpass their abilities. Unless every cast member in a production understands the material as much as the person who wrote it, there will be imperfections. And that's pretty unlikely. It might not be as entertaining to read a script as it is to watch a film, but screenplays are - in a way - superior to productions. Before the film is made, the potential is infinite.

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFD01r6ersw)
 
Last edited:
People are incapable of sticking their heads up their asses.
Click to expand...

Ohh....I beg to differ. It's warm up there. :)


Snowtown

Snowtown-cropped-proto-filmcritic_reviews___entry_default.jpg


Good film. Had seen the trailer but was completely unaware of the fact it was based on fact.
 
Tiny Furniture

i found it very relatable. reminded me big time of Me and You and Everyone We Know. they share almost the exact same ending. and many themes. loneliness, direction, and human connection in our age of sterilization, physchiatric drugs, and the web. both star the director/writer. i can only imagine lena dunham would cite miranda july as a source of inspiration. it's been too long since i've seen it, but i am pretty sure i like miranda's version more.

the dialogue is a little off-putting. an attempt at youthful, dry wit. feels awkward sometimes, especially during the first half. tries too hard for the way people actually speak. not a good strategy for dialogue in my opinion.


Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol

in-flight movie. lots of stylized fighting, gadgets, and chases in cities all over the world. that's the goal, right? i don't really have anything to say about it other than that léa seydoux films well and is properly cast. [spoil]too bad they kill her off so early.[/spoil]
 
Last film I watched was Enemy Of The State, was convinced that I'd seen it before and didn't like it so ignored the netflix recommendation. Gave in and watched it today and enjoyed it. It's about one of my favourite topics too, pricacy rights vs. 'national security' so was glad that I watched it.

Been watching tons more films now that I can stream netflix through my ps3 so should be hanging out in this forum more often:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top